38 / MARCH 2014 /

[ OPINION ] GOLF ON TV
To ask Grant a question, or share your opinion,
e-mail us at golfdig@newslifemedia.com.au
G
E
T
T
Y
I
M
A
G
E
S
D
ING! Another text message lands inthe inbox, and I snap
to attention. It may be a newphone, and a subtly different
sound, but it invokes the same universal, Pavlovian
response. It isnt a number that I instantly recognise. The name
though, cuts through. Its someone intimately involved inthe
broadcasting of Australiangolf. Asports nut, a lover of golf, a
thinker and innovator, and a guy who is always looking to make a
better televised product of every sport he is involved with.
The text is emotive inits tone. Tiger Woods just shoots 62 in
the tournament that he hosts and refuses to do aninterview! That
is why the sport is not safe! The message is a continuationof an
ongoing post mortemabout golf onTVand follows onfrommy
involvement inthe Network Sevencommentary teamonthe 2013
AustralianOpenbroadcast.
That post mortemwas a discussionintwo parts. It gave credit
where credit was due (TVratings were up 85 per cent onthe
previous year), recognising the eect that the Summer of Scott
had ongolfs place inthe public consciousness. But it also asked
anobvious, and somewhat uncomfortable question. What would
we be reecting onif AdamScott hadnt played?
The discussionkept coming back to the product. Yes, the
AustralianOpenrated its socks o, but it was blessed with the
tournaments two marquee players contending all week, and
being drawntogether inthe nal round. The event remained
indoubt right up to Rory McIlroys dramatic, and tournament-
deciding birdie putt onthe nal hole. It was a script writtenin
golng heavenat a time whenAustraliangolf needed to prove
itself as a marketable commodity to both televisionexecutives
and the corporate world.
As my colleague pointedout, the stars hadaligned, but it was
hardly the result of any innovationor change tothe way that golf
presenteditself. Golf inthis country is broadcast basically the
same way it has beenfor the last 20years. Where other sports have
innovatedandtakenthe viewer closer tothe action, allowing them
a greater level of intimacy withthe competitors, golf has stucktoa
formula that succeeds or fails onthe backof one factor star power.
Australian television is too reliant on our
sports superstar-factor. By Grant Dodd
Golfsbig
broadcast
challenge
It worked for a decade whenGreg Normanwas at the height
of his powers. Whenyou put the Shark onscreen, all problems
were solved. Of course, that strategy was ne until Normans
ame inevitably died out. Since that point, weve sat and waited
inanticipationof the second coming. Scotts emergence as a
talismanic gure in2013 may be a momentary x for our messiah
complex, but the similarities to the past are glaringly obvious.
That xationwith star power is closely related to the reason
why Tiger canrefuse to engage ina post-round interview, secure
inthe knowledge that no sanctionwill be imposed. If the only
means of validating the product is via who tees it up, thenthe
worlds golng stars knowthat they hold all the cards.
It is true that all sports rely, to some extent, onthe cult
of celebrity. Golf inthis country though is fundamentally
dependent uponit, meaning that our sport seems only workable
as a televisionproduct if we have a superstar who the agenda
revolves around. Clearly, this is recipe for disaster, or at the very
least, another period of cyclical regressioninthe near future
unless we nd a way of making it more palatable to a wider, less
bolted-onaudience.
Its a discussionworthy of a greater degree of elaboration,
and one that Ill continue innext months
AustralianGolf Digest.
AGD0314p038 38 28/01/14 9:16 AM